This seems like a good place to start:

https://github.com/antifa-n/pihole

… In Minecraft.

*FSR4

Ahhhhhhhh!

I’m having a particularly braindead morning. Mario and Luigi are two people. 1 in 3 leaves the possibility of a third person being ugly and both Mario and Luigi being not ugly. Why does Mario conclude Luigi is ugly based on the 1 in 3 comment?

Oh, if so, then nevermind.

I assume it’s going to be a cloud connected screen that streams games. There’s no current way to get thermal and power requirements met for PS5 on a handheld. They’re just trying to remove the in-home PS5 requirement from the Portal.

Don’t you dare speak that into existence.

There are three practical reasons Trump does this:

1. Deflection: Trump doesn’t have an affirmative platform. As a populist strongman, Trump’s platform is situational and entirely based on what his supporters want to hear in any given moment. If health care is in the news, Trump will say his plan is coming in two weeks (it won’t ever come). If immigration is in the news, Trump will say he will build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it (he won’t). But what’s even easier? Focusing on the shortcomings of the opponent’s platform. Any time this works, Trump saves himself an opportunity to be put under the microscope.
2. Deflection: Manipulating the media works. Trump knows that the more ludicrous things he says about Kamala, even if the media then starts to talk about how he’s wrong or fact-check him, the focus is still on the thing he said rather than Kamala’s platform. It’s subtle, but it really does focus the media effectively on whatever he says, and use his frame of that issue as the media’s frame.
3. Filling the echo chambers and other spaces. We’re in our own echo chambers like never before. Trump says these things so that the people in the right-wing echo chambers have a plausible response to Kamala’s policies, or even just need filler for their broadcast/websites/Facebook groups. Ultimately there is only so much media people can consume every day. If Trump has filled all relevant supporter spaces with his own opinions & framing, there is no time or energy left to explore other opinions and framing.

I hope you’re right.

I’m not that optimistic. Like the “object to counting and send it to the House where they pick Trump” option, there was a spurious but plausible “legality” to Hitler’s rise.

In Russia and China, the institutions still exist, and probably still pass general laws and adjudicate day-to-day matters with apparent legitimacy. But once Putin or Xi expresses his respective will, they are merely intermediaries and there is no independent check on their power.

Similarly, the press in Russia or China presumably isn’t micromanaged at every level, but instead, like we’re already seeing the first signs of with the Post and LA Times, preemptively compliant with propagandistic goals, with occasional punishments and examples made to keep everyone afraid of crossing the line (which is intentionally never clearly defined).

There are lots of ways that institutions are the illusion. Those institutions are just collections of people. People are flawed, open to intimidation. When Trump sends in deputized posse to arrest or beat non-compliant politicians, or editors, or judges, sanctioned by the Supreme Court as an official act because he makes some argument they were interfering with executive duties, the rest of the politicians, editors, judges will fall in line. They won’t save us if Trump is in power.

It was a big part of what led a fairly democratic state to freely choose to elect a person who literally went on to kill millions, on purpose, when anyone who had a clear picture of reality would have been able to see it coming a mile away.

Just to be clear, though: Germany didn’t elect Hitler. He was appointed by the President at the time, Hindenberg, on the advice of the ex-chancellor Papen (who believed he could “tame” Hitler in his post as vice-Chancellor). See the wiki. Something I’ll find interesting if Kamala wins the popular vote and loses the electoral college.

Another quote from the same article, which has no relevance whatsoever to America and the GOP today:

Both within Germany and abroad, there were initially few fears that Hitler could use his position to establish his later dictatorial single-party regime. Rather, the conservatives that helped to make him chancellor were convinced that they could control Hitler and “tame” the Nazi Party while setting the relevant impulses in the government themselves; foreign ambassadors played down worries by emphasizing that Hitler was “mediocre” if not a bad copy of Mussolini; even SPD politician Kurt Schumacher trivialized Hitler as a Dekorationsstück (“piece of scenery/decoration”) of the new government. German newspapers wrote that, without doubt, the Hitler-led government would try to fight its political enemies (the left-wing parties), but that it would be impossible to establish a dictatorship in Germany because there was “a barrier, over which violence cannot proceed” and because of the German nation being proud of “the freedom of speech and thought”.

Impressive how quickly things when from “this is fine, we have this under control” to Hitler assuming permanent, unchecked, dictatorial power, he was sworn in as Chancellor on January 30, 1933 and the Enabling Act was passed March 23, 1933 - less than 60 days. By December, 1933, all other political parties were prohibited.

Uh… 🙋

Ah, I see. Yep, the Statute of Anne broke up the Shakespearean monopolies and after that brief high point, it was all downhill.

Are you referring to the DMCA? That was never to help the little guy.

Wild, thanks!

Where are you seeing that? Not seeing this in the Onion recent queue.

From the art, this looks like a verrrry early one. Must not have added it to the repertoire yet.

This is a better link.

They’re really good, consistently.

I’m not sure if there’s a better archive, but you can find a few more here:

https://theonion.com/the-handmaids-pigtail/

I want…juicy oil and milk

Your honor, I yield my rebuttal time and rest my case!